Scales' Illustrative Format
Usual illustrative formats are ladders (or pyramids), to indicate levels of some aspect, and thermometers, to indicate degrees of feelings. Other illustrative formats can be clocks to indicate the timing of things, or dials to enter numerical values.
Theoretical arguments
- Offering a thermometer scale usually requires lengthy introductions (Alwin 2007).*
- Thermometers and ladders may not be good measuring devices because all points cannot be labelled (Krosnick and Presser 2010).*
- Use thermometers, ladders, telephone dials and clocks for numerical scales with many points (Sudman and Bradburn 1983).*
Empirical evidence on data quality
YES means that there is an effect on quality either positive or negative impact. NO means that there is no effect.
*DeCastellarnau, A. Qual Quant (2018) 52: 1523. doi: 10.1007/s11135-017-0533-4
- Ladder scales obtained lower validity than other types of scales [Construct validity] (Andrews and Crandall 1975) → YES*
- Reliability is higher for a rating scale than for the feeling thermometer [Pearson product-moment test-retest correlations] (Krosnick 1991) → YES*
- The ladder scale provided better reliability and validity scores than other scales [Pearson correlations and convergent validity] (Levin and Currie 2014) → YES*
- Responses are significantly different whether a pyramid or an onion format is used [Response style through distribution comparison] (Schwarz et al. 1998) →YES*
YES means that there is an effect on quality either positive or negative impact. NO means that there is no effect.
*DeCastellarnau, A. Qual Quant (2018) 52: 1523. doi: 10.1007/s11135-017-0533-4
References
Alwin, D.F. (2007). Margins of Error: A Study of Reliability in Survey Measurement. Wiley, Hoboken
Andrews, F.M., Crandall, R. (1975). The validity of measures of self-reported well-being. Soc. Indic. Res. 3, 1–19.
Krosnick, J.A. (1991). The stability of political preferences: comparisons of symbolic and nonsymbolic attitudes. Am. J. Pol. Sci. 35, 547–576. doi: 10.2307/2111553
Krosnick, J.A., Presser, S.: Question and Questionnaire Design. In: Marsden, P.V., Write, J.D. (eds.) Handbook of Survey Research, pp. 263–313. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley (2010)
Levin, K.A., Currie, C. (2014). Reliability and validity of an adapted version of the cantril ladder for use with adolescent samples. Soc. Indic. Res. 119, 1047–1063. doi: 10.1007/s11205-013-0507-4
Schwarz, N., Grayson, C.E., Knauper, B. (1998). Formal features of rating scales and their interpretation of question meaning. Int. J. Public Opin. Res. 10, 177–183. doi: 10.1093/ijpor/10.2.177
Sudman, S., Bradburn, N.M. (1983). Asking Questions: A Practical Guide to Questionnaire Design. Jossey Bass, San Francisco
Alwin, D.F. (2007). Margins of Error: A Study of Reliability in Survey Measurement. Wiley, Hoboken
Andrews, F.M., Crandall, R. (1975). The validity of measures of self-reported well-being. Soc. Indic. Res. 3, 1–19.
Krosnick, J.A. (1991). The stability of political preferences: comparisons of symbolic and nonsymbolic attitudes. Am. J. Pol. Sci. 35, 547–576. doi: 10.2307/2111553
Krosnick, J.A., Presser, S.: Question and Questionnaire Design. In: Marsden, P.V., Write, J.D. (eds.) Handbook of Survey Research, pp. 263–313. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley (2010)
Levin, K.A., Currie, C. (2014). Reliability and validity of an adapted version of the cantril ladder for use with adolescent samples. Soc. Indic. Res. 119, 1047–1063. doi: 10.1007/s11205-013-0507-4
Schwarz, N., Grayson, C.E., Knauper, B. (1998). Formal features of rating scales and their interpretation of question meaning. Int. J. Public Opin. Res. 10, 177–183. doi: 10.1093/ijpor/10.2.177
Sudman, S., Bradburn, N.M. (1983). Asking Questions: A Practical Guide to Questionnaire Design. Jossey Bass, San Francisco